Miscellanea

From the New York Times article "The Guts of a New Machine":

''Most people make the mistake of thinking design is what [the product] looks like,'' says Steve Jobs, Apple's C.E.O. ''People think it's this veneer -- that the designers are handed this box and told, 'Make it look good!' That's not what we think design is. It's not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works.''

Despite his power on paper, U.S. administrator L. Paul Bremer is effectively a lame duck, and everyone who disagrees with the U.S. plan knows it.

From the New York Times article "Iraqi Leaders Say U.S. Was Warned of Disorder After Hussein, but Little Was Done"...

Rumsfeld's mistake: In many ways the war plan drove the postwar plan, senior military officials said. ... the plan for after the Iraqi government fell assumed that Iraqi troops and police officers would stay on the job — an assumption that proved wrong. "The political leadership bought its own spin," said one senior Defense Department official involved in the planning, in part because it "made selling the war easier."

Bush's mistake: Last fall, experts from the State, Defense and Treasury Departments and other agencies began writing the outlines of plans for dealing with potential civilian crises in postwar Iraq, establishing a new government and other issues. But, officials said, the White House failed to resolve a feud between the State Department and the Pentagon over which department would oversee the mission, a fight that was settled only in January when Mr. Bush chose the Pentagon.

The real mistake: In the end, administration officials appeared to have formed their views by picking and choosing from the advice offered

In light of the many bad moves by the U.S. in the occupation of Iraq, it's at least good to see the Army isn't blind to its mistakes:

"Because of the refusal to acknowledge occupier status, commanders did not initially take measures available to occupying powers, such as imposing curfews, directing civilians to return to work, and controlling the local governments and populace. The failure to act after we displaced the regime created a power vacuum, which others immediately tried to fill."

"Despite the virtual certainty that the military would accomplish the regime change, there was no plan for oversight and reconstruction."

"At first, the [Iraqi] people were anxious to get started and looked to the U.S. for assistance. They soon saw us as being unable or unwilling to get anything done."

"The visible clues that may have provided a detailed analysis on WMD production, research and development, or storage were either destroyed or carried away by the local populace."

(Excerpts from "U.S. Wanted to Avoid ’Occupier’ Label".)

Simply amazing.

...corrupt airport employees, motivated by greed, might just as well have been collaborating with terrorists as with drug smugglers....

A good read, especially for those prone to pessimizing with respect to America's future.

Looks like some people in the Pentagon may be learning a thing or two from from Iraq:

The Pentagon has begun to look seriously at creating military forces that would be dedicated to peacekeeping and reconstruction after future conflicts, defense officials said.

Though it looks like some others still need convincing:

The idea is likely to face stiff resistance in the Army, where many still hold to a mind-set characterized by one civilian Pentagon official as 'We just do combat, and stability ops is a sideline.'

The agreement between the U.S.-led coalition and the Iraqi Governing Council on the formation of Iraq's new government.

Some interesting stuff. I wonder how much support it will draw from Iraq's population.

Saw this quote on on IraqBodyCount.net. While I think Iraq will be better in the long-term without Saddam, it does underline the audacity of the Bush administration's decision for invasion:

Extending the war into Iraq would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Exceeding the U.N.'s mandate would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land.

-- From "Why We Didn't Remove Saddam," by George Bush [Sr.] and Brent Scowcroft (Time, 1998)

Whether or not Bush wrote it himself, this is a powerful, well-written speech.

In particular, it's good to see Bush express this belief: "Modernization is not the same as Westernization. Representative governments in the Middle East will reflect their own cultures. They will not, and should not, look like us. Democratic nations may be constitutional monarchies, federal republics, or parliamentary systems."

(On the other hand, it would be nice to see him demonstrate this belief: "Successful societies limit the power of the state ... so that governments respond to the will of the people and not the will of the elite.")

Highlights both the similarities and differences between Iraq and Vietnam. Quite insightful.

Excerpt:

"'Quagmire,' 'attrition,' 'credibility gap,' 'Iraqification' — a listener to the debate over the situation in Iraq might think that it truly is Vietnam all over again..."

"But Iraq is not Vietnam, and 2003 is not 1975 or 1968. Saddam Hussein was driven out of power and his regime collapsed last spring. There is no independent sanctuary named 'North Iraq' for his Baath Party henchmen to fight from, no Soviet Union to keep them supplied with arms and fuel..."

Some interesting ideas, such as a requirement that at least half of the appointed one-third of the upper house be women. (Surprisingly, no mention in this article of anti-terrorism powers.)

Of course, it will be equally interesting to see how much of this constitution ever meets with reality.

To anyone who advocates a rapid withdrawl of troops from Iraq: please read this article. This time around, the French are most certainly not right.

Wow. This is really good.

Probably the best article by Thomas Friedman in a while.